The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
that's one of the challenges right there with you know food frequency questionnaires is that they start asking them to you know ask them what foods they're eating or they ask them what foods they ate and oftentimes just that by asking they're changing their behavior and so you're not really getting an accurate representation of what they ate previously right so that's a problem that that plagues epidemiology
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.